Environmental Engineering Research

Korean Society of Environmental Engineers (대한환경공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Ultrafiltration of palm oil mill effluent: Effects of operational pressure and stirring speed on performance and membranes fouling

  • Yunos, Khairul Faezah Md (Department of Process and Food Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Putra Malaysia) ;
  • Mazlan, Nurul Ain (Department of Process and Food Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Putra Malaysia) ;
  • Naim, Mohd Nazli Mohd (Department of Process and Food Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Putra Malaysia) ;
  • Baharuddin, Azhari Samsu (Department of Process and Food Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Putra Malaysia) ;
  • Hassan, Abdul Rahman (Department of Manufacturing Technology, Faculty of Innovative Design & Technology, Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin (UniSZA))
  • Received : 2018.05.15
  • Accepted : 2018.07.27
  • Published : 2019.12.27
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Palm oil mill effluent (POME) is the largest pollutant discharged into the rivers of Malaysia. Thus UF membrane study was conducted to investigate the effect of pressure and stirring speed on performance of POME treatment and fouling of membrane. Two types of membrane polyethersulfone (PES) and regenerated cellulose (RC) with molecular weight cut-off (MWCO) 5 and 10 kDa were used in this study. Results showed that, as pressure increased, fouling increased however permeate quality improved, the best pressure was 1.0 bar, where the fouling was not too high and produce good permeate quality. As stirring speed increased, fouling reduced and permeate quality improved, however, when stirring speed increased from 600 rpm to 800 rpm, there was no significant improvement on the permeate quality. Therefore, the best condition was at 1.0 bar and 600 rpm. PES membrane with MWCO 5 kDa showed the best permeate quality, even fouling slightly higher than RC membrane. The permeate quality obtained were analyzed in term of dissolved solid, turbidity, suspended solid, biological oxygen demand ($BOD_5$) and chemical oxygen demand (COD) were 538 mg/L, 1.02 NTU, < 25 mg/L, 27.7 mg/L and 62.8 mg/L, respectively with dominant type of fouling is cake resistance. Thus, it can be concluded water reuse standard was successfully achieved in terms of $BOD_5$ and suspended solid.

Keywords

References

  1. Ahmad AL, Ismail S, Bhatia S. Water recycling from palm oil mill effluent (POME) using membrane technology. Desalination 2003;157:87-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-9164(03)00387-4
  2. Mohammad AW, Ng CY, Lim YP, Ng GH. Ultrafiltration in food processing industry: Review on application, membrane fouling, and fouling control. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2012;5: 1143-1156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-012-0806-9
  3. Ahmaruzzaman M. Adsorption of phenolic compounds on low-cost adsorbents: A review. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 2008;143:48-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2008.07.002
  4. Ahmad AL, Sumathi S, Hameed BH. Residual oil and suspended solid removal using natural adsorbents chitosan, bentonite and activated carbon: A comparative study. Chem. Eng. J. 2005;108: 179-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2005.01.016
  5. Van Reis R, Zydney A. Membrane separations in biotechnology. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2001;12:208-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0958-1669(00)00201-9
  6. Wu TY, Mohammad AW, Jahim JM, Anuar N. Palm oil mill effluent (POME) treatment and bioresources recovery using ultrafiltration membrane: Effect of pressure on membrane fouling. Biochem. Eng. J. 2007;35:309-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2007.01.029
  7. Azmi NS, Yunos KF. Wastewater treatment of palm oil mill effluent (POME) by ultrafiltration membrane separation technique coupled with adsorption treatment as pre-treatment. Agric. Agric. Sci. Procedia 2014;2:257-264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaspro.2014.11.037
  8. Tardieu E, Grasmick A, Geaugey V, Manem J. Influence of hydrodynamics on fouling velocity in a recirculated MBR for wastewater treatment. J. Membr. Sci. 1999;156:131-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-7388(98)00343-3
  9. Ognier S, Wisniewski C, Grasmick A. Influence of macromolecule adsorption during filtration of a membrane bioreactor mixed liquor suspension. J. Membr. Sci. 2002;209:27-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-7388(02)00123-0
  10. Mirsaeedghazi H, Emam-Djomeh Z, Mousavi SM, Aroujalian A, Navidbakhsh M. Clarification of pomegranate juice by microfiltration with PVDF membranes. Desalination 2010;264:243-248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2010.03.031
  11. Tansel B, Dizge N, Tansel IN. Analysis of high resolution flux data to characterize fouling profiles of membranes with different MWCO under different filtration modes. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2017;173:200-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2016.09.032
  12. Nourbakhsh H, Alemi A, Emam-Djomeh Z, Mirsaeedghazi H. Effect of processing parameters on fouling resistances during microfiltration of red plum and watermelon juices: A comparative study. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2014;51:168-172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0472-3
  13. Na J, Yonggang Z. The effect of humic acid on ultrafiltration membrane fouling. Energ. Procedia 2012;11:4821-4829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2011.10.915
  14. Jun Z, Yang FL, Meng FG, Peng AN, Di WA. Comparison of membrane fouling during short-term filtration of aerobic granular sludge and activated sludge. J. Environ. Sci. 2007;19:1281-1286. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-0742(07)60209-5
  15. Hammer MJ. Water and wastewater technology. Singapore: Prentice Hall. 1986. p. 519.
  16. Susanto H, Ulbricht M. Photografted thin polymer hydrogel layers on PES ultrafiltration membranes: Characterization, stability, and influence on separation performance. Langmuir 2007;23:7818-7830. https://doi.org/10.1021/la700579x
  17. Puro L, Kallioinen M, Mänttari M, Natarajan G, Cameron DC, Nystrom M. Performance of RC and PES ultrafiltration membranes in filtration of pulp mill process waters. Desalination 2010;264:249-255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2010.06.034
  18. Yorgun MS, Balcioglu IA, Saygin O. Performance comparison of ultrafiltration, nanofiltration and reverse osmosis on whey treatment. Desalination 2008;229:204-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2007.09.008
  19. Chollangi A, Hossain MM. Separation of proteins and lactose from dairy wastewater. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensification 2007;46:398-404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2006.05.022
  20. Nakatsuka S, Michaels AS. Transport and separation of proteins by ultrafiltration through sorptive and non-sorptive membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 1992;69:189-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-7388(92)80039-M
  21. Boyd RF, Zydney AL. Sieving characteristics of multilayer ultrafiltration membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 1997;131:155-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-7388(97)00045-8
  22. Mohammadi T, Esmaeelifar A. Wastewater treatment using ultrafiltration at a vegetable oil factory. Desalination 2004;166: 329-337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2004.06.087
  23. Kang SK, Choo KH. Use of MF and UF membranes for reclamation of glass industry wastewater containing colloidal clay and glass particles. J. Membr. Sci. 2003;223:89-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-7388(03)00311-9
  24. Lee N, Amy G, Croue JP, Buisson H. Morphological analyses of natural organic matter (NOM) fouling of low-pressure membranes (MF/UF). J. Membr. Sci. 2005;261:7-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2005.02.039
  25. Choi H, Zhang K, Dionysiou D, Oerther DB, Sorial GA. Influence of cross-flow velocity on membrane performance during filtration of biological. J. Membr. Sci. 2005;248:189-199 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2004.08.027
  26. Mourad H, Martine MP. Analysis of deposit behaviour in crossflow microfiltration by means of thickness measurement. Chem. Eng. J. 2002;86:251-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1385-8947(01)00184-X

Cited by

  1. Innovative Optical-Sensing Technology for the Online Fouling Characterization of Silicon Carbide Membranes during the Treatment of Oily Water vol.20, pp.4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/s20041161
  2. Review on current approach for treatment of palm oil mill effluent: Integrated system vol.286, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112209